updated with Atari 2600, 7800, Lynx and GBC.

PC Engine is an 8-bit machine as it had an 8-bit CPU... And that tends to be the part that influences what "bits" a platform is classified as.

We could argue that the dual 16-bit graphics processor is what makes it 16-bit, but then that would mean the Master System and Lynx was also 16bit due to also having a 16-bit graphics processor.

Fun fact... The Original Xbox was a 32bit console... And it was vastly superior to the Nintendo 64 in every single way, despite that console being 64bit.

"bits" itself doesn't really characterize the capabilities of a device or it's visual output (Hence the wide varying visuals on offer in the ops comparison.)


I am more than happy to do a breakdown of what "bits" actually is and entails in regards to processing if people are interested in that sort of thing.

Solaris was honestly an impressive game for the 2600. I was around for it when it was new. I wish it would have been on the Atari Flashback collection on Switch, but Doug Neubauer was savvy enough to make sure he retained the copyrights to his game.

It’s not even a contest. The PC Engine mopped the floor with all the others.

So much so that I bought a used one after already owning a Super Nintendo. I was sold into believing it was superior. It felt more impressive for a time but it quickly broke. 

very impressive machine

Like others have said, it's no contest if we compare the PC Engine to the others here - I mean, it had bigger sprites and much better color than even the Mega Drive.

The US release of the PC Engine as the TurboGrafx-16 is a perfect example of trying to make a product seem more powerful by making it bigger and more expensive: The PC Engine was an adorable little console; the TG16 was made extra big with a lot of unnecessary plastic. It also required extra add-ons just for multiplayer and stereo sound (every region). But the system's fate was much different in Japan than the rest of the world. It would have been interesting to see what would have happened if the console released earlier everywhere else as it had a pretty great library of games, with the CD library in particular being much better than the Mega Drive's CD offerings.

The poll and the title to this thread says "8-bit generation".  The PC Engine is not really considered part of that generation even if it does have an 8-bit CPU.

Looks like the NES basically had the same CPU as the Atari 7800. And overall, the consoles have pros and cons, but are vaguely on par. It makes me wonder what could have happened if the two had an even competition. Even though the NES was superior at scrolling, I can imagine a world without the 1983 crash where the NES is home to home-tailored experiences like sidescrollers while the 7800 was the definitive console for many arcade ports, especially since the 7800 had more colors available, larger possible sprites, etc.

I think the outcome would have been largely the same. The NES got a lot of arcade ports, and while the NES was definitely not strong enough for arcade-perfect ports, a lot of them were very good arcade ports, especially for Capcom games. Some home versions were arguably better than the arcade thanks to the developers working their games around the strengths and weaknesses of the NES. Bionic Commando comes to mind here, as it was kind of a meh game in the arcades while being one of the most well-loved NES games.

The reason why the NES wasn't known for its arcade ports was because the NES had games like SMB 1-3 and Zelda, which not only provided experiences better than the arcade, but were beyond what the 7800 was capable of. The 7800 had potential for larger sprites than the NES, but the CPU wasn't really up to the challenge of rendering them, so that advantage was nullified. I don't see the 7800 being able to replicate a lot of Atari Games's late 80s games. The 7800 also had the same sound chip as the 2600, which meant that it had worse out-of-the-box sound than the 5200. Some 7800 games apparently included the sound chip from the Atari 800, which had far and away the best sound of early home computers, at additional expense to Atari.

I actually felt that game wise, the 7800 was a step down from the 5200, which was based on the architecture of the Atari 8-bit line. The Atari 8-bit computers, which I had back then, give you an idea of what the 5200 could have been if it hadn't had those awful joysticks (which, to be fair, did try to innovate by being a precursor to modern analog controls.)

It released in 1987... So it could have been an extremely late 8-bit console or an extremely early 16-bit console that is actually 8-bit.
But it does fall in the 4th generation of consoles.
But I think the context of the Op is to lump "all" 8-bit devices together as a singular generation based on hardware characteristics, hence the mix of 1st-2nd-3rd generation devices.

Either way, the PC Engine is a difficult beast to quantify, but hardware wise it's part of the 8-bit hardware generation thanks to it's CPU, despite being a part of the 16-bit console generation.